first to br.Uighur....
thanx for ure post and appreciation...i agree with ure opinions raised on the way this thread is going..we have better things to talk about in this thread...

can u please let me know where we shias "INSULT" the companions??

our stance towards the people who were with the Prophet (s.a.w) is same as the stance of H.Fatima (s.a)...

if any difference is seen, then do let me know....

now to sis mariyah ..
it is right that its uselss to "FIGHT" over issues...but discussion does help bring people closer....i have nothing against sunnis nor m sure u dont have anything personal against me...its just that we shud concentrate on removing the confusions between us...

talking about confusions, this guy sign*reader is doing its best to prove something baseless...br Uighur is right that if i take ure (sign*reader)'s stance then its useless...as jahaalat exists on all sides.....

but still if u want to raise ure question on things wich we believe then u are free....if i knw the answer..or the sources, i will try to adress it...

btw....my local paper is not something i consider 100% authentic..specially wen it talks about islam..even if i live in a muslim country...
they quote from sources such as Reuters and AFP...wich are kuffaar sources...so useless attempt man....

Brother asda I know you guys love Ali and family of our prophet but scholars from sunni also very much like ahlul bayat ,for me Ali is one of the beloved person . Regarding your point ,according your source Ali was prevented from claiming Caliphhood by Abu Bakir ,Omer ,Osman . This is someting I can't understand but shia scholars can/t expalin this strange evet without using some sensitive languages to famous companions like Abu Bakir ,Omer ,Osman.That eventurally damage their own image among muslims . I think that is one important reason why marjoiry of Muslim reluctant to accept shia or do you have better theory to explain this issure ?...I mean without using unacceptable language when it concern with our respected companions

the sunnis are reluctunt to accept the shia belief is becaus of 1 REASON....and that is....NONE OF THEM KNOW WAT THE TRUE SHIA BELEIF IS......i am really serios wen i say this and it is not a stray comment....

i live in a majority sunni country, and have loads of sunni friends...and NONE of them know wat the true belief of shias are...i mean accusations like shias have 40 siparahs, shias indulge in dirty sexual acts in the haram of Imam Hussain (a.s), shias kill their children to have Niyaz, shias beat their chldren on ashura, shias hate sunnis, shias believs that Imam Ali(a.s) is Superior to Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) (maazallah), shias say Imam ALi (a.s) is god(maazallah) and LOADS MORE TOHMAT ARE COMMON AROUND ME....and for a fact, not even ONE OF THEM IS CORRECT...and what surprised me is that all of this was told to them by SUNNI SCHOLARS which they followed.....

well as for ure question goes, it is a vaast topic which can be devided into 2 parts..

1: Did Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) select Imam Ali (a.s) as his successor, or in short, did Imam Ali (a.s) deserve to be the successor of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w)?

2: Was Abu Bakr a person who deserved to be a successor?

i want u to pick one of the 2 so that it will be easy for me to discuss the topic...

.I know above
mentioned rumors regarding shia, at least to mainstream , is baseless however
it would be wrong of you if you try charge sunni scholars as preachers of such
claims . I am sunni Muslim & I have a Imam uncle who used to say Ali is
gate of knowledge .Actually it is him I first heart of Ahlul Bayat . He taught
me how we Muslim should love ahlul bayat but my uncle was not shia he wassunni who fellow hanifi mashab like me. I
think you are probably referring to so believed vahabii/salifi scholars or their followers whose creed
is not really compatible with aflul sunne’s believe in some aspect . I don’t
like vahabii/salifi scholars they make war everywhere they go create &
create internal conflict among Muslims ,just leave them but hope you don’t
abuse faithful sunni scholars baselessly

If you read history where were occurrence
Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) appointedAbu Bakir as Imam in his absences on other time
Prophet
Muhammad (s.a.w) pointed
Ali as leader on military marches , You also found lines prove how much our
beloved Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) close to Ali however you also can find Hedsth
that could prove how Prophet Muhammad trust Abu Bakir .If you try to prove Imam
Ali (a.s) deserve to be the successor of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) before Aba Bekir that kind of claim won’t be strongbecauseyourclaim would be at odd
with companions’consensus。Don’t you think so ?Companions as direct students of our
beloved Prophet Muhammad occupy fatal place in my heart, there are plenty of
hedths confirming importance of Companions.
If you believe your intelligent much higher than companions,
I couldn’t accept it by whatever means .

You think
main reason for refusal of shea is ignorance
of true shia creed but many sunni Muslims today are living without knowing
sunni believe too, as many US citizen living without having look to constitution
.

Br...
u have based the idea of khilafat on the very act of consensus among the muslims......other than than....no method works.....i hope i am clear on ure views...

Allah (s.w.t) has said in the holy quran:
24:55. All�h has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Isl�m). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the F�siq�n (rebellious, disobedient to All�h).

http://www.dar-us-salam.com/TheNobleQuran/surah24.html

can u please show me the same consensus seen in the past before Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w)??? beacuse the quran clearly confirms that the way of establishing khilafat will be the SAME as done b4.....
it is highly prefferable to do the tafseer of Quran from Quran, thus it is better if u can bring an event in quran where such an act was done...
obviosly, the next source is hadith...u can look into history....if u can find any...then do let me know....

Brother asdaWhat are you trying to say ? I am confused, perhaps i am not smart enough to get point ... Are you saying consensus is not matter before Allah .So we must keep our eyes on Allah's word & put the consensus aside no matter whose consensus would be . But how this common logic ,which no one can oppose ,something to with my argument ? Or is there a line in holy Quran that saying Imam
Ali (a.s) deserve to be the successor of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) before Aba Bekir ? If you find a justification of such claim in Quran by using <highly prefferable tafseer of Quran from Quran> ,it indicate you have better understanding of Quran than Sahabe Kerim ,therefore we must take your enlighted opinion while consensus of derict student of our beloved prophet avaible ? But you know all knowlege we have on islam traced back to sahaba ,should we reconsider these knowlegde according you suggection since you have better understanding Quran ?

Allah (s.w.t) has said in the holy quran: 24:55. All�h has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Isl�m). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the F�siq�n (rebellious, disobedient to All�h).

asda, the above is a translation you have given of the verse 24:55. The translation is quite good except that your translation has put in some condition. That is not there in the verse. You perhaps think that Allah will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Isl�m). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me as if it is something that they will have to do. That is not the case.

The verse stipulates that when they will be granted the Khilafat, the religion will be better established and fear will disappear. As a result, the believers will serve Allah and they will not associate any one with Allah. It is not a condition you have initiated as PROVIDED... There is no such thing.

It states that Khilafat will be established. The Momineen will serve Allah only. They will not associate any one with Allah. It also shows that they will not make dance halls and palaces and places of entertainment and dens of drunkards. It is giving correct news that THEY WILL SERVE aLLAH and NOT ASSOCIATE ANY WITH ALLAH.

Please do not say provided they will serve Allah and provided they will not do any Shirk. I agree to the translation except what I have pointed out above. You presentation can lead believers into wrong alleys.

Also, it is important to learn that the prophet s.a.w.s. said, "My companions (Sahabah) are like the shining stars. Whomsoever you will follow, you will be guided."

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum